[…] Another comic on how we don’t actually know why Trump won. […]
-
I think Austria may be the next successful fascist takeover, as the fascists won the last election (largest party, 29%…
Ryan North's To Be or Not To Be did have queer content IIRC. Haven't read Romeo and/or Juliet.
@Dianne, Did you predict that Biden would win? I think everyone knew Roe was going down as soon the combo…
Thanks, BCB! That's neat about the fringe festival show. There's also Romeo and/or Juliet, a choose-your-own adventure book that was…
-
I’m all against racism. But what supposedly triggered this campaign was that cartoon – and I just can’t believe the guy claimed it was racist.
“Racism” is used nowadays for any and everything, including “hey, YOU NEVER KNOW when you can be offensive to anyone, so I’ll call you racist just for the sake of it, ok? Even if you’re not being racist per se. After all, it’s just a matter of offending people who we never know might be offended or not, it’s a matter of not letting that happen AT ALL, so let’s call you RACIST, right? Much better, don’t you think?”
Jesus.
I’m all against racism. But what supposedly triggered this campaign was that cartoon – and I just can’t believe the guy claimed it was racist.
Whereas I can’t believe that a thinking person could look at that cartoon and not be outraged at its blatant racism.
Clearly, therefore, the discussion is long overdue.
I think the reason for the idea that this cartoon is “racist” is not that black or dark skinned people are depicted as cannibals, but that they are depicted using stereotypes from bad 1930’s “b” movies. Many cultures practised cannibalism. Not as a way of life, but in ritualized forms. I don’t think of dark skinned races when I hear the word “cannibal”. I think of the Donnor party, rugby players, Chikatilo, Packer, Fish, Gein, Dahmer. This cartoon didn’t strike me as “racist” so much as just not well thought out.
Eh. Hard to get excited about arguing about definitions of racism (or feminism). Different people will use the words differently. Let’s talk consequences.
I harbor stereotypic views about all people of a given race, or gender, or social class, or age, etc. I even harbor a stereotypic view about all people: that all people hold stereotypic views, at least provisionally. So now I see that some guy drew a cartoon with a stereotypic depiction of black cannibals. Does the author harbor stereotypic feelings about blacks? I expect so, but then, I expected that even before I saw the cartoon. I am more interested in the question, what harm did the cartoon do?
Stereotypic views, when widely held, can have devastating consequences. Racism played a role in US slavery, lynchings, the death of MLK, and depressed social statistics for blacks generally. A person who suffered from stereotype has cause to be mad about the stereotype, at least in proportion to the stereotype’s harm. And that person has cause to be mad at people who act on the basis of the stereotype, at least in proportion to the action’s harm. Alas, I sometimes sense a tendency to blame the racist individual with all the collective harm of racism; the sexist individual with all the collective harms of sexism; etc. I sometimes take a mental shortcut: The cartoonist is racist. Racists are responsible for killing MLK. Ergo, the cartoonist is responsible for killing MLK!
No. The cartoonist is responsible for making a cartoon. It might be a racist cartoon. It might even be a harmful cartoon. But it’s just a cartoon. The cartoonist had nothing to do with slavery, with lynchings, with the death of MLK, and is probably no more responsible for the depressed living standards of blacks than the rest of us are.
The only difference between that cartoonist and myself is that he has made a display of his stereotypes; I’m still striving to conceal mine. Having made this display, the cartoonist now becomes a symbol for centuries of slavery, lynchings, etc. That is, he becomes a RACIST.
As Amp and Chris Clarke observe, the harm of racism arises from its systemic, institutional quality, not from the bad intent of racists. As they note, words like “racist” or “anti-feminist” can serve a useful, descriptive purpose – but only if we can transcend the idea that they are simply pejorative epithets. I do not regard racism (or sexism) as a moral failure any more than I regard poor math skills as a moral failure.
That does not mean that I find these qualities to be desirable, or even neutral. It doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t take steps to counter them. And if your mechanic miscalculates your bill, feel free to express your frustration with his shortcomings. But don’t blame him for the faulty engineering that caused the New Orleans levy to collapse. They may both have been due to bad math, but the one has nothing to do with the other.
Racism is a catastrophe. Racists are merely human symbols of that catastrophe. It makes no more sense to lump all racists together than to lump all blacks together. On National Racism Day, strive to transcend stereotypic thinking about blacks, and about racists.